"Getting to know the Personal
Data (Privacy) Ordinance" (cont.)
Journalists' Concerns
The concerns of journalists, on the other hand, reflect
the tension that exists between the right to freedom
of expression and the right to protection of privacy.
Privacy has famously been described as the right to
be left alone but it is the essence of journalism not
to leave alone something about which the public should
be informed.
The tension between these two rights was paid very
close attention during the evolution of the Ordinance,
not least in the committee of the Legislative Council
chaired by the Hon. Emily Lau Wai-hing, which scrutinized
the Ordinance prior to its enactment.
Journalists' Sources
The first concern of journalists is with respect to
their sources, particularly confidential sources. A
common question asked by journalists is : does the Ordinance
prevent sources from passing on information?
The difficulty for a source is that the personal information
he or she wishes to disclose to a journalist was most
likely not originally collected for this purpose. The
data protection principles say that the information
should not be used for a new purpose such as this without
the consent of the individual concerned. However, if
the source wishes to "blow the whistle" on someone they
are hardly going to seek, let alone obtain, that person's
consent to tell a journalist. On this basis, President
Nixon would never have been impeaches.
The Ordinance deals with this restriction by allowing
disclosure of personal information to a journalist where
the source has reasonable grounds for believing that
the publishing or broadcasting of the information is
in the public interest. Accordingly, the Ordinance simply
reflects the existing basis on which sources generally
provide inside information to journalists. Of course,
the decision to disclose information to a journalist
still rests with the individual or organisation concerned.
A second worry a confidential source may have is the
possibility of being found out. A possible scenario
under which it is feared this would happen goes like
this. A confidential source discloses information from
internal files to a journalist about the dubious activities
of a particular individual. The journalist publishes
a story exposing that individual's activities.The individual
who is the subject of the story complains to the Privacy
Commissioner about an alleged breach of privacy rights.
Could the Privacy Commissioner require the journalist
to reveal the identity of the source as part of his
investigation?
The first point to make is that it is most unlikely
that the Privacy Commissioner would wish to do this.
But the straight answer is that the Privacy Commissioner
cannot require a journalist to reveal the identity of
a source without the authorisation of the High Court.
And in considering whether such authorisation should
be given the High Court is required by the Ordinance
to consider a list of matters, including: whether the
alleged contravention of the Ordinance is of sufficient
gravity; whether the investigation would be substantially
prejudiced if the relevant order were not made; and
whether any common law privilege applies. The net effect
is that a very high test must be met before a Court
Order to this effect could be granted under the Ordinance.
Interference in News
Gathering
Apart from issues relating to sources, concerns have
also been expressed about a possible chilling effect
on journalists caused by requests for access from individuals
to the personal information they have collected in their
news gathering activities. The safeguard against this
provided by the Ordinance is that there is only a right
of access to personal information that has actually
been published or broadcast. In other words, any material
that has not been published or broadcast, for example
a journalist's notes and other source materials, are
not covered by the access right at any time, before
or after the relevant piece is published or broadcast.
The Ordinance also carefully circumscribes the Privacy
Commissioner's powers of inspection and investigation
in relation to journalists. He has no power of inspection
of any part of a personal information system that holds
such information for the purpose of a news activity.
Also, the Privacy Commissioner can only investigate
a suspected breach of the Ordinance following a complaint
and even then only after the material that is the subject
of the complaint has been published or broadcast.
All this does not mean that journalists are outside
the coverage of the Ordinance. Other than the limitations
already described on the individual's right of access
to personal information held by journalists, the data
protection principles apply in full to news gathering
activities. This includes the requirement to use fair
means to collect personal information. A requirement
which has its counterpart in the stipulation of the
Hong Kong Journalists Association's Code of Ethics that
information should generally be collected by straightforward
means.
